Here is where Lizzie beat up on me over at Catallaxy.

Old Tom Below Parr, you are a prize idiot.

First you rabbit on at the end of the Corona Virus Thread saying that a virus by itself can’t do much damage. Hello? Smallpox, Rubella for a foetus, HIV, Measles, Ebola and so on. The 1918 Influenza virus and plenty of others too didn’t need much help. In 1918, some people died within 24 hours or less of showing haemorrhagic viral attack in a variety of body tissues and systems, or just from total viral shock without haemorrhagic expression. The consensus now is that only one transmuting virus was responsible too. And then there were the secondary pathogenic attacks.

Lizzie sure knows her epidemiology doesn’t she? I think she had a big responsible job in epidemiology at a university when she was a bit younger. After doing a man’s job for so long I suppose that could be one of the reasons she feels a need to over-emphasise her femininity on Catallaxy.  I don’t think thats a bad thing at all. Quite the contrary; I wish there was more of it.  Its just something to note.

Yeah I can see I wasn’t careful enough when I talked about this one on Catallaxy and I can see why I was raising peoples temperature by playing down just how powerful a single virus can be. Unfortunately Sinclair wiped my somewhat cavalierly written posts on this matter so I cannot reproduce them and show where I was being a bit ridiculous. And also clarifying what I meant.

Lets number down what she has mentioned.

1. Smallpox.
2. Rubella for a foetus
3. HIV
4. Measles
5. Ebola
6. Spanish Flu

My argument, perhaps poorly worded, goes a bit like this; If you are tanked up on Iodine and vitamin D beforehand. If you have some selenium now,  and more stashed away when this virus hits town. And if you have a great big hoard of liposomal vitamin C, plus someone looking after you, no one virus ought to be able to do you in. I’m not too much disagreeing with Lizzie really. Because I admit that I was sounding a bit cavalier, pointing to the possibility of a beat-up, or alternatively of a more serious biological attack going on.

So what I’m saying is, since I was trying to put three hypotheses on the table (beat-up, biological warfare, and real organic disease) that made me play up a fundamental weakness of a single virus.

My argument is that a virus lacks the genetic sophistication to create serious poisons. But earlier I had admitted that this virus could really fuck you up because it goes after your lungs.

A single virus can usually only kill you if it throws you into a vicious cycle. 

I am particularly susceptible to that sort of lurgy that gets in your lungs. Since I spent 22 years breathing in flour in my workplace. So I, least of all, want to be unprepared for this particular nasty when it rolls out here in the winter. Once you get into a vicious cycle, where you can never sleep, because lying down makes you cough so much you can barely breath. So you cannot sleep. So you cannot fight off the virus. So you die.

I don’t usually believe in drugs and medications. But here I make an exception. I go straight for the cough suppressant so my lungs don’t get too irritated by the coughing. I also mentioned that we need to have our beds tilted upward. So that lying down doesn’t bring on the coughing. I’ve got ten ways to get rid of viruses from the rest of my body. But they are so hard to get rid of from some of these extremities like the lungs. Or the skin. Or if the nasty bacterial infection is hiding in a rotten tooth. Very easy to clear a body of the virus proper.  Very hard to chase the virus beyond these extremities.

So lets go through these examples mentioned by hyper-feminine Lizzie.

1. Smallpox. Kills through bleeding. Hard to get it out of your skin. You have to kind of pay that one. But notice it died out once we had a lot of flush toilets and clean drinking water. Viruses can be very infectious. But you’d have to wonder about how infectious this one is with hand-washing, flush toilets,  a lot of sunlight coming into houses, and sterilised water. Because as deadly as it was,  smallpox turned out to have short legs, once hygienic conditions were improved

How would smallpox go if we had high vitamin D levels, liposomal vitamin C on hand, cranked up on iodine which I’m slipping into my beer right now? Plenty of Selenium? How would we go? We will never know. Though it appears to have cut through scantily clad (one imagines) North American Indians? We don’t have the details. We can make no sound judgement.  I suspect that if we had all these things on the fly smallpox would stay local.

2. Rubella for the foetus. So you want Mum to have caught Rubella already. Caught and recovered from Rubella before she gets pregnant.  To the rest of us Rubella is pretty harmless. In fact we want to have had it. Of course a developing foetus can be knocked off its path of sound development very easily.

3. HIV Sorry Lizzie I don’t have to pay that one. While I may be exaggerating when I say that viruses don’t have the genetic sophistication to put down a well looked after person (with a string of caveats) not so with HIV. Because these retro-viruses are even so much more primitive than normal viruses. Nope. Thats not a valid example. The cells they infect last no more than about six weeks. The best that a retro-virus could do on one of these cells,  is to add a tiny amount of extra overhead to the immune system.

4. Measles.  Case in point.  Supposing Mum was never vaccinated and she got measles as a kid.  Suppose you get breast-fed until you are 4.  You stop being breast-fed.  You catch measles.  Mum watches you closely and looks after you.  Your immune system only gets better.

5. Ebola. Attacks the skin. Pretty hard to get rid of these skin infections. But notice. It never really spread to the rich countries. If you had all these things on hand that I’ve already listed the repair job would be almost as fast as the damage being done.

Looks like its a poor country problem. I think people who were looked after in the way I suggest would pull through pretty quickly. Unless you get into a vicious cycle.

Note how once your skin was peeling off then you open yourself to other problems. Thats the vicious cycle I’m talking about. Its probably only when these secondary problems are opened up that this would cause too much of a problem for you, which would make it too hard to fight off the initial virus. Without the secondary problems, and with selenium and liposomal vitamin C,  I imagine the virus would be gone in a short period of time, like most viruses.

6.  Spanish Flu.  Thought to be neither Spanish nor flu nor even a single virus.  Biological warfare so it doesn’t really count.

I am not saying that Lizzie didn’t win that argument with a good clean knockdown. Its just that my reasoning was spread over several comments. She probably read one poorly worded screed, and as an expert in the field,  she would have been mortified.
As I said Sinclair wiped out all my comments. But I advanced a similar argument over at opinion-dominion. I don’t think Steve has gotten rid of it. So I’ll reproduce it here:

“Probably Soon is over there using Chinese slang terms as deep cover. Chinese people can see us as smelling bad being as we tend to be more hairy than they are and they can smell the dairy products on our sweat. I’m here sweating all the time and probably clear through until April. Believe me I shower often. But if I want friends who are Asian girls all over again I better be perfumed up because those girls have noses like bloodhounds.

Nonetheless there is a scintilla of truth to the idea that the Chinese can be a breeding ground for new viruses and I believe its to do with part of their country being deficient in Selenium. Though today the deep state will be trying all manner of population control and ways to sicken all of us in general, and the Chinese people particularly.

We all better have a good stash of selenium, super high dose vitamin D from overseas. And if you can afford it a big box of lipisomal vitamin C. Also start building up the iodine in your system and maybe even think about colloidal silver. Think about leaning your bed uphill in some way, so that you can breathe better if you can barely get out of bed for a few days.

Viruses don’t normally have the genetic sophistication to hurt people all that much. But this one appears to be going straight for the lungs. If you can keep breathing you will pull through.”

I hope this post isn’t as flippant sounding as the one that lead to Lizzie beating me senseless in an argument. I’m not saying viruses cannot kill people. Clearly they can. But if you prepare and you have people who care about you, you should pull through.

Okay so you see why I looked authentically a bit silly this time around at Catallaxy.  And it may seem that me getting beat up is what this post is about.

Thats not the issue.  I want you to read this one over and over and over.  Because I’ve included everything you need to face down this lurgy, should it make it here in an organic sense, this winter.  Just read it again and find out about everything I want you to do to beat this thing.  Not excluding tilting your bed.  And you’ll get through it.  Even if you have but one single family member continually washing sheets and carrying soup.

You and I have been swamped with the idea that the Iranians are these great terrorists.  This is something the great terrorist Netanyahu reinforces every time he opens his deeply sick and racist mouth.  It would have not escaped Netanyahu’s attention, and the attention of yahoo’s everywhere, that the drumbeat of Cato the Censor (Carthage must be destroyed) was ultimately successful.

The Israelis need not be destroyed.  But Jews must be brought under strict third party control, something akin to the control they have us under now.  We have to be released from our shackles, they must be under some supervision to make sure they forget about all mischief, and therein will be the peace and flourishing of the species.

For the rest of us we just need to use zen thought control techniques to counter-act the hateful rolling thunder of defamation, blood libel, and demonisation that the Jews have foisted off upon the gentile in stages.  The Russians copped it. The proud Cossacks were horribly defamed and slaughtered under zionist influence.  The Germans still suffer under the menace and blood libel of the Jews.  Then it was the Arabs turn.  And in fact the Jew defames whitey whenever he gets a chance. Organised Jewry is psychopathic against all Yamnaya.

So take the following information and see how it can be reinterpreted under the expectations created by Jew demonisation.

Here the great warrior shows us what he was really working for.  The safety and security of all of Gods children.  But in the light of Jew demonisation the picture changes radically.

Exhibit A

The White Prince, destroyer of ISIS, warrior for civilised values,  with a little Yamnaya Gentleman.

Exhibit B

Longstanding killer of women and children, the well-known terrorist Professor Moriarti Soleimani bin Goldstein, has captured an American child and is now brutally extracting information from the victim,  to aid in his plot to harm Americas legitimate interests.

From Elsewhere:

Just great that Robin Duell is thinking in these terms whether he’s right or wrong. “If I have seen further it is by standing on the shoulders of Giants.” Some folks interpret that as Newtonian putdown on the physical stature of Robert Hook. I prefer the motto of “seeing further by pushing down hard on the heads of recalcitrant dwarves.” Because most of ones understanding comes when you are arguing with people who have ran out of sane argument. WXcycles is no dwarf and in good time I’ll be going back to take in every word he’s written. A goldmine of excellent information. His combination of detailed observations, with pure fantasy physics, has helped me put this lingering nuisance of the circumpolar current to bed. Well at least its help me have a functioning mind model of what is going on.

So in my model of what is going on you have negative charge being created at the earths centre. Which has a voided region, where the iron crystalline core is supposed to be. As you have to conclude with any rational analysis of gravity, up and down reverse at some point as you travel to the centre of the earth. It may even reverse three times but it reverses at least once. Anyway the negative charges generated at the centre end up rising up to meet the positive charges coming in from space. Ultimately from the sun of course. But not limited to daytime. But Antarctica is covered by an insulator. Thick ice insulation So the positive charges have no choice but to swirl around and around the continent scooping up any negative charges they can find. Negative charges will be more concentrated on the coast where there is no ice, then in most places on the planet. Since the full body of the continent is covered by an insulator.

>>>>>>>>>

I was arguing with a BOM meteorologist over at Joanne’s place.  He lost the argument so I was trying to shame him into an admission.  But the scientific method is not favoured amongst scientists.  So I’ll copy one of his comments just so you know what I’m talking about.  Then I’ll copy all my responses so you can figure out what is really going on outside of his fantasy version.

More Later.

Its true that I cannot prove the above statement because the bad guys have monopolised on the data.  But its the most likely hypothesis so I’d like to see research out there to prove if its wrong or right.  The global warming fraud, when confronted with the heat island effect, comes up with some fuckwit saying that the effect is not all that bad.  Then thats the end of the matter.  So they won’t compile separate graphs where the heat island effect is not part of the story.  They wave it away.  So we don’t have honest ground data outside the American raw data.

We have to work with whatever we have.  We cannot use the fraudulent NOAA and GISS data.  We know its dirty.  So we don’t have much to work with but we have to scrounge around for what we can get.

Tony Heller has managed to search out old Australian and American data that is honest data.  The fraudsters have this excuse that the lower 48 States is only 2% of the global area so they bullshit people that we can dismiss this data.  But its the only sound data that has been compiled without being fucked by Oligarchical minions.  Not all of them gentiles.  So we simply must go with the data we have.

What Tony Heller has gotten hold of shows us that we must presume a slight cooling trend for the globe as an whole, based on Australian and American data,  if the 1890’s or the 1930’s is our starting point.  Take another starting point and you may find another trend.  There is no excuses not to extrapolate this to the globe as an whole until you can find honest data for the globe as an whole.  And the money is not there to do that.  The data is there.  The money is lacking.

The honest way to go forward is not to whine that the Australian and lower 48 data is not complete.  It should be representative,  and if we are unsure we should expect money forthcoming for people to keep adding sanctified measuring stations.  No heat island effect and no fucking excuses for the heat island effect.

But what about the honest data?  The balloon radiosondes and the satellite data since 1979 is still honest data.  But there is a problem with it.  It gives us a false positive for very obvious reasons.   And the frauds on Broadway have exploited this false positive mercilessly.  Frauds on Broadway, not all of them gentiles, have taken the false positive of the honest satellite data, combined with their own horseshit, to allege that they have an 86% probability that the year 2016 was the hottest year on the instrumental record.

Complete fucking lies but very hard to stand up and call out once you have admitted that the satellite data is honest data.   So the forces of evil have landed one clean on the jaw here,  and its got even the biggest skeptics acting very cautious and restrained.  I see these dudes backing off some because the satellite data isn’t telling them the story they expected.

So what is going on here?  Let me explain this to the layman, to see why this supposed confirmation of the lies of the bad guys, by the satellite, is got to be assumed to be, at maybe 98% certainty, a false positive.  And why this cannot be resolved without an honest survey of the ground data.

Since the global warming fraud has started people have talked as if the sun did not give off infra-red.  In reality more than half the energy we get from the sun is infrared.  Since the global warming fraud people have talked as if the infra-red absorbed by CO2 is independent of that absorbed by water vapour.  In reality they are overlapping.  And while CO2 is a narrow absorber in three tiny ranges,  water vapour is a wide-spectrum absorber of infra-red.

In other words if CO2 mixes above water vapour it is absorbing some infrared prior to that infrared hitting the water vapour and heating it up.   As a result of that absorption, in the first instant at least,  some of the area above where water vapour taps out should be warmed by extra CO2, at the expense of the region underneath.  So our first assumption has to be that extra CO2 cools the atmosphere below the clouds but warms some part of the atmosphere above that.

Now how about the greenhouse myth towards the make-up of the light from the sun being too much in the higher spectrums, whereas the thermal energy coming off the earth being all in the infra-red?  Well thats kind of crazy-talk.  Because the ratio is less than two-to-one.  What about other energy?  Well yes you have electrical energy difference between the ionosphere and the deep earth.  Which is really a residual difference between the sun and the deep earth.

This electrical energy will get converted to thermal energy,  thermal energy has a way of working opposite to gravity, and the CO2, particularly where and when the air is dry, will pick up some of this, which the water vapour may not have done so on its own.   As we can see there are a lot of wild cards which mean we must rely on good data.

You might think that its a reasonable position to take that the CO2 will clearly absorb more joules outgoing than joules incoming so we can right away infer net warming.  The reasoning might go like this;  Since the ratio of infra-red incoming to infrared outgoing may be (lets say) 1.8 to 1 … and since I’ve admitted to another incoming source of energy … that will pull it up to maybe 2-to-1 and so the global warming theory still holds.

But in a 3 dimensional model, rather than a model based on watts-per-square-metre,  not every joule is equal.  Image a pyramid house.  Is the heater in the attic as effective as the heater in the basement, for heating the pyramid house, joule for joule?  No of course not.  The heater in the basement is far more important.   So the matter simply cannot be resolved except empirically.

Now we come to the honest data we do have.  And thats the satellite data from 1979 to the present.  Which does seem to show a tiny bit of CO2 warming.  Because the temperature has gone up even during solar cycle 24 (a weak solar cycle) leading to the hottest year being in 2016.   Well as we have seen the LEAST in doubt idea is that the extra CO2 ought to warm the atmosphere a little bit, above the clouds.  Above at least where the water vapour taps out.  So we expect a false positive with a high level of certainty.  Because of reasons explained above we don’t really know the net effect on the ground.  I say that the net effect on the ground ought to be cooling.  But for reasons explained thats more than can be inferred by just thinking deeply about it.

We need good ground data.  And no more excuses for why we don’t have it.

Is it pretty clear why the reverse square law for gravity isn’t a law but a range limited emergent property? I think I’ve dealt with it elsewhere amongst a big meandering thread. But I may have to do a single thread going over that material because it may be a bit confusing to some people. In order to create a cult of personality over Einstein that had to have a parallel cult to do with Newton. And Maxwell for that matter. So they can kind of jump foot to foot.

We can skim over the basics.  Gravity is a force.  Its obviously a pull-force.  And its instantaneous, this implies constant contact.  We know that matter is all joined by an aether since light has wave-length. Wave requires a medium. That medium is called the aether.  So we already knew that matter maintained constant contact, since matter is visible.

Mother nature is parsimonious with its mechanisms so that this same aether is responsible for gravity.  This aether theory is very similar to Bill Gaedes rope theory.   The thing is though, that the smallest unit of aether, has to be very tiny in comparison to an individual proton, electron, and neutron.  Since no one strand of aether has any real effect on any of these.  That is to say when it comes to the very small stuff the pull force of the connections is vanishingly tiny.

If this is new to you, take a breath and absorb all this, because we have to dive into the implications of how gravity would work nucleon to nucleon and what the implications are when we scale up.

Just in passing lets mention the electric universe guys.  Their main insight is that electrical effects, deeply mysterious that they are,  scale really well.  They see the same things happening on the scale of light years, that they see on the scale of just a few centimetres in the lab.  I think they have made their case really well.  But gravity, that slight pull-force that the aether creates, almost by accident, DOESN’T scale real well.

I think aether scales real well.  In that I think a Birkeland current is acting like a giant strand of aether, even though its travelling through all these tiny strands of aether.  And when light travels through aether its as though the aether is “scaled up” to allow it to do so.

Electrical effects aren’t size dependents (or so the case is very well made) but gravitational effects are.  Because a small insect barely feels the force of gravity as he climbs up a wall.  But the fat man feels the force only too much as he walks up the stairs.

Now imagine that the nucleon to nucleon gravitational force drops off to the third power and not to the second.  Like an inverse cube law.  You are on a spherical earth but the surface is perfectly flat.   Every molecule on the planet and in the air above you is exerting a pull force on you, but some of them at different angle.

As you ascend to the clouds like Jesus does in the story,  think of how the force vectors from many of the molecules of earth are changing?  The higher you go,  the closer to straight down a lot of these force vectors are becoming.  Now do you see what I’m saying about the end result being an emergent property?   The force vectors are changing so the resultant force is becoming more effective.  Thus compensating in such a way as to make the drop-off in force less pronounced.

Anywhere above the point where hydrogen weather balloons tap out, the only things subject to gravity are orbiting.  That is to say moving roughly perpendicular to the earth.  I’m saying that this movement reduces the gravitational pull “a little bit.”  Some items will have an elliptical orbit.  All circular motion involves acceleration.  But elliptical orbits accelerate and decelerate a lot more than circular orbits.  I’m saying acceleration, unless the movement (not the acceleration itself) is towards the earth (rather than perpendicular to it)  breaks a lot of aether connections and therefore reduces the force of gravity “quite a bit.”   So I’m saying that the inverse square law isn’t really true, only appears to be true, and only appears to be true in a fairly limited range, and that its an emergent property for the reasons mentioned.

Just wanted to clear that one up.  Because the big thread on growing earth, gravity and mountain-building can be a bit hard to follow.

So if you were to plug this sort of thing into a computer model you are going to find out why orbits are so forgiving.  Why gravity is not clumpy and crash-happy.  Why mathematicians can barely solve a three-body problem but the galaxy solves a multi-billion body orbiting problem effortlessly.  Why NASA finds that rockets pick up anomalous energy when they slingshot them around planets.  Why spiral arm galaxies don’t act the way the mainstream wants them to, so they had to make up dark matter.  All that stuff is explained by the above view of gravity.  So I’ve really cracked it. These problems can be solved if you listen to dissident voices, stop putting down people as “crackpots’ and you dwell on these things long enough.

It is on the basis of this Galaxy Rotation Curve, that stupid-town has postulated dark matter.  What an embarrassment!  So what is the answer to this alleged anomaly? The way we see galaxies moving in the real universe is inherent in everything I’ve already said about physics. Galaxies ought to act in the way they do indeed act, according to what I’ve said already.  But its easier to understand why, than it is to explain why.  So I’ll do my best to give you a feel for this.

We need to recap the basics of how matter and gravity works.   When you have one large object and one small object the two objects want to amalgamate.  So if one object is bigger than the moon and the other is smaller than Phobos, typically they want to come together.  But if both objects are larger than the moon they want to orbit.  And their orbit will be energy-positive.  New pristine energy will be created during this orbit.

When contemplating matter in the process of evolving,  it ought to occur to you that if the above rules weren’t in place,  no meaningful reality could have gotten going.  Gravity would make matter clumpy and crash-happy.  If Gravity worked in accordance with the modern stupidity gravity would be clumpy and crash-happy. So this idea of larger objects wanting to orbit and smaller objects wanting to amalgamate with larger objects, was necessary for our particular FORM of matter to gain the edge during the evolution of matter.

The above speculation as to ancient matter evolution might not be readily apparent as a necessary consequence of sound reasoning,  until you realise that for the universe to exist in the form we find it, somewhere along the line a form of matter had to evolve which was conducive to the creation of more matter.   Matter must help in the creation of new matter, or each new act of matter creation, would amount to a separate miracle.  Our matter is fairly durable and doesn’t break down quickly.  Nonetheless it does break down,  and so we have a basis for the evolution of competing forms of matter.   So you see there is a number of characteristics for the matter we see everywhere to achieve,  before it could have gotten everywhere in the quantities we see it.

Matter helps create new matter and so that moons grow to planets grow to gas giants grow to stars grow to bigger stars, and if they grow big enough they become a big dark object like Sagittarius A*.  There is electrically only room for one of these beasts per galaxy.  When another object gets to that size,  it will be pushed out of the galaxy as a Quasar.  The Quasar will take a bunch of stars with it,  and form a new galaxy.

Now of course this idea that the universe is only 13.8 billions of years old is complete stupidity and the creation myth need not detain us here.  Our sun will be a lot older than that.  And Jupiter will be much older than 13.8 billion years as well.  The milky way galaxy is hundreds of billions of years old for sure.

So the orbits of the spiral arms have come about under the above rules over many hundreds of billions of years.  In the analysis of the mainstream the time factor is left out of the equation.

So we see that even objects as small as the earth and the moon don’t want to collide.  The orbit introduces pristine energy. And yet the orbit is very forgiving.  They don’t wish to crash.  But they aren’t wanting to separate completely from each-other.  That being the case how is it that the orbits separate out into spiral arms?

The orbits of planets and moons wants to get bigger for starters but its a slight and slow thing that goes in line with the growing size of the objects.  This tendency of orbits of non-stars (but large objects) to grow,  is therefore not sufficient cause for spiral arm segregation.  Or for new stars to get their own solar system.

But supposing you come back and these objects have progressed onto both being big stars?   Thats not a likely story that they would still be together.  Because every so often you get an eruption from the centre of the galaxy that blows up moons, planets and stars, and then a whole lot of orbits are rearranged,  over hundreds or perhaps a few thousand years.

But supposing they have been together all this time?  There is an additional factor making these stars want to be forced apart.  You see stars have a proton wind.  So two stars have an extra factor repelling them.  Actually Saturn and Jupiter both have proton winds as well.  But I would not think that this proton wind would amount to much, given the problem to hand.

So anyhow you can kind of imagine that with the above rules in place, the serendipity of exploding objects, and the repulsion of proton winds, that these stars will separate out, firstly into separate solar systems (our sun may have once been a planet orbiting one of those big chunky stars of Orion) but also into spiral arms.   Most solar systems are dual star by the way.  So the solar system separation is yet to occur in these cases.

Now we come to this alleged anomaly, that has led these cosmologists to make complete fools of themselves.

So this gives you a bit of an idea what is going on here.  After a short distance out, the speed of the stars rotation around the milky way stabilises.  Why would this be an anomaly?  Certainly its not something to be inventing non-existent dark matter about!  You see what is going on here?  The stars closer to the centre rotate around the galaxy,  at about the same speed, as the stars further out from the centre.  Why would this be odd? Is the mainstream just playing silly buggers with us?  Why pretend this is a strange situation when its exactly how you would expect these stars to behave?

Well about 120 years a bunch of oligarchs and Jews came up with a strategy to take over physics and cosmology.  One standard technique for exercising control over others was to force people to believe something that could not be true under any circumstances.  But one of these bright sparks had an inspiration …… “Why not this time..” said the little rat fink “…. we instead force people to DISBELIEVE something we know for a fact is true …… its really the same technique after all…..”

So since we knew that there was an aether, being as we could measure the wave-length of light, these horrible little Bolsheviks started applying political pressure, to outlaw the aether.

Now the aether connects every nucleon with every other, but were these permanent connections there would be no movement at all.  All matter would be fixed in relation to all other matter.  So therefore we know that all aether connections are always in the process of breaking and reforming.  Anti-gravity efforts consist of not allowing aether connections time to reform,  as well as they might.

So supposing you are a star orbiting the galaxy and a star further out from the centre is ahead of you.   But you are gaining on that star since you have less of a distance, given that your circular orbit is inside the orbit of the star in question.  Well that start pulls you along a little bit, and when you overtake you pull that star along a bit, and its as easy to see as can be possible that the speeds would become very similar.

So we already know that aether connections are constantly breaking and reforming.  But if they were rigid and supposing the galaxy was rotating, the further out the stars were the faster they would be going.  But we know that gravity doesn’t work like that, and particularly from the orbits of planets in our own solar system.  The closer in the faster you move, when it comes to planets and moons within our solar system.

But in the case of stars in the galaxy, the  outer and inner stars end up homogenising their rotation speed to a very great extent.  Which confirms pretty much everything I’ve said about the way gravity works and refutes everything these clowns in the mainstream say.   But they won’t take “no” for an answer so they are back with this “dark matter” idea.   Its morons we are dealing with here.  Morons and people of bad character.

Another thing to remember.  While Newtons formulae appear to work pretty well in the inner solar system, the inverse square “law”, as explained elsewhere, ought to be considered an “emergent property” and not the actual reality.  On a nucleon to nucleon basis its more likely that the drop-off in the gravitational force of attraction is closer to the 3rd power.  On that level it might be closer to an inverse cube law.  But you have to consider the speed-and-acceleration,  at which the object are moving in relation to each-other,  as well as the angled force vectors operating on the two objects.  It is likely that the inverse square law is merely an emergent property,  that only works after a fashion, at middling distances.

A consequence of this misunderstanding will have the cosmologists under-estimating the mass of the outer “gas giant” planets, which aren’t gas giants at all.  Just big rocky planets with gigantic oceans and outsized atmospheres.

A consequence is that stars will be more influenced by other stars near to them, than by the central mass of the galaxy, than what the mainstream will have in their calculations.

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

Bill Gaede talks about the galaxy as moving like a Catherine Wheel.  Well I’m not so sure about that.  He may be oversimplifying here.  But he gave me the idea to just look at the Catherine Wheel in contemplation of the galaxy.  Who the hell knows what electrical forces are being unleashed here?  Bill is no fan of the electric universe crowd.  I think he’s being too hard on them.  But I’ve just described all this proton-wind repulsion going on in the galaxy.  Electrical effects are tricky things and you’d have to wonder what the net result of all this positive charge repulsion would be,  when most of the balancing negative charges are kind of hidden from the picture I’m painting.

So you guys who understand electricity better than I do, maybe just watch this here Catherine Wheel spinning a bit, in contemplation of the Milky Way galaxy turning.  It might help you think more clearly and come up with something really cosmic.

Candidate Ron Paul was an old, near-minarchist right-wing Christian white male Republican.  Candidate Tulsi Gabbard is a young, left-wing, mixed race, female, Hindu Democrat.  They are the same.

Don’t ask me straight out to prove they are the same.  I’m supposed to be the worlds most holistic prophet.  Prophets aren’t going to spell it out for you.  Ron Paul and Tulsi Gabbard are the same in ways that go far deeper than the biffing and baffing of contemporary politics.

I was putting about the idea of the Ron Paul “I am Ron Paul”  meme well before the campaign took it up.  I started saying “I am Ron Paul” well before that, and specifically on the Louisianna university blog. The LSU tigers blog.

But I got  the idea of it from the Spike Lee movie about Malcolm X.   So it may have been me who passed it on to the Ron Paul team. Or they may have made that same mental link on their own.   But I was inspired by Spike.  And Brother Malcolm.  A real brother to us all.

I won’t say that Ron Paul, and Tulsi Gabbard, and Malcolm X are the same.  Because the oligarchy murdered Malcolm before,  or just as he had put together the full flowering of his intellectual righteousness.  They murdered Malcolm and yet stole his sperm.  Thats how evil these people are.

Malcolm had a way of saying everything that John Galt said with oh so fewer words.

I am Malcolm X and by any means necessary.   But the oligarchy murdered Malcolm too soon so I won’t make a troika out of this.

I cannot as a prophet spell these things out to you.  But I’ll give you a clue.  Or rather I’ll let “My Chemical Romance” give you the clue as to why Ron Paul and Tulsi Gabbard are the same.

Only the first two minutes of the song is relevant, or any good,  but the first two minutes of the song is worth listening too many times.

The tide goes in and out and the words used in the language of politics take different shades as to their meaning.  But Ron Paul and Tulsi Gabbard are the same.  In a way that escapes any kind of obsession with contemporary politics.

Ron Paul and Tulsi Gabbard are the same.  In a way that goes deeper than left or right. Up or down.

“Number of electrons in each shell

Each subshell is constrained to hold 4ℓ + 2 electrons at most, namely:

• Each s subshell holds at most 2 electrons
• Each p subshell holds at most 6 electrons
• Each d subshell holds at most 10 electrons
• Each f subshell holds at most 14 electrons
• Each g subshell holds at most 18 electrons

Therefore, the K shell, which contains only an s subshell, can hold up to 2 electrons; the L shell, which contains an s and a p, can hold up to 2 + 6 = 8 electrons, and so forth; in general, the nth shell can hold up to 2n² electrons.^[1]”

When each shell is filled up we have the family of inert gasses.  You can see them in the periodic table.

In a reducing environment, an electron-rich environment, some of the gasses that are not inert gasses will start acting more like them.  Its as if their electron shells will be filled out.  These elements will then tend to want to separate out from their chemical bonds.  One doesn’t want to be too absolutist about this. But the tendency will be there.

Elsewhere you will see me claiming that “up'” and “down” reverse as we head to the centre of the earth.  They may reverse once or three times.  If we follow matters upward from the earths surface we see that if the depth of the ocean were equalised all over we would have solids, liquids, then gasses, then gasses separated out by molecular weight, then an area of charged particles, essentially protons and electrons.  Which I think is what the Van Allen belts are all about but its hard to get confirmation of that.  Then there is space.  So it goes solids, liquids, gasses, protons, electrons, then space.

In my model something like this is going on as we go to the centre of the earth.  The difference is that thermal energy is trapped within.  So matters are happening at a very high temperature.  The order is solids, liquids, gasses.  But these gasses include pretty much all the elements.  Being as the temperature will be so hot.  Remember up and down are reversed.   So up is towards the centre of the earth well before you get to the gas stage.

The last layers are Helium, hydrogen, protons, electrons, space.  The space becomes a small gamma ray sun.  This is because the last two layers lead to charge separation, which leads to charge buildup.  Which leads to all pervasive negative charge.  And since this charge is so focused we have a kind of spontaneous plasma focus “machine” as it were.  Since its gamma rays in free space we have pair production.  Since we have such a powerful negative charge buildup we have easy fusion building of heavy elements.  I have made this claim before.  That fusion is easy and natural, but no energy spinner.  That it happens very easily in a situation of high charge buildup.

But while there is no air pressure right at the centre, further back in the opposite direction the gas pressure buildup is very strong.  So the hot gasses pierce DOWNWARDS (paradoxically towards the earths SURFACE) even though these gasses are lighter than the liquids then solids they are burrowing into.

Now these gasses will burrow down, until “up” and “down” are reversed and then they will get a bit of a boost in their attempt to make it towards the earths surface.  On the other hand as they cool they will liquify, solidify, and mix together.  But they won’t mix as well as they otherwise might.  Because of the pervasive negative charge environment. They’ll mix alright but not even close to as much as we would otherwise expect.

And so we get our earths negative electrical field and we also get ore grade magmas.  If heavy metals were only created in supernovae, as the ludicrous mainstream theory alleges, none of this would be possible.

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

Okay what is the alternative environment to the beginning of life that I’ve been banging on about as a corrective to the modern feebleness of evolutionary theory? The chemists find their theories of the origins of life to be pretty untenable.  But think of what is going on in the middle of Pluto? I suggest that pluto has started its new matter creation process. But its mostly hydrogen.  Smaller amounts of oxygen, carbon and other elements.  But mostly just hydrogen.  So you get the buildup of gasses at the centre, and this leads to these active volcanoes that NASA found on Pluto.   The liquid water comes out of these volcanoes, freezes as it is released and lands as ice on the ground.  Probably a lot of this ice will sublimate not having the atmosphere to keep it there but here I am speculating.

The point is you’ll have the reducing hydrogen heavy gasses, with a strong electron-rich environment, such that the normal laws of chemistry don’t apply. You’ll have the hydrogen biased gasses that are needed to spontaneously produce amino acids.  But on earth things have heated up too much in the middle of the earth.  So you cannot now have the interior of the earth as the place for the evolution of life.  But the water coming out of Pluto’s volcanoes may only be luke-warm, and largely driven out by gas pressure and not by heat as such.

So what we might have, throughout much if not most of the interior of Pluto, is the venue I’ve been banging on about, that could be conducive to the evolution of life.

So here what I’m saying is that primitive life evolves in proto-planets in the boonies.  Far away from a star.  It has to be in the boonies to keep the heat low enough for the process to continue for billions of years.  Abiogenesis has to go on OUTSIDE of the inner solar system of stars.  Then to get life on a surface of a planet, that planet has to come in from the cold somehow.

Those of our brothers who wish to diversify away from hydro-carbon energy have to realise that energy economics is not all common sense.  Substitution away from primary energy sources is a very slow process.  Even very competent economists who have not specialised in the quirks of energy economics may not realise that one of the iron laws of energy economics is that substitution rates are painfully slow.

As a result the best results will be found in ENERGY EFFICIENCY of hydro-carbon use, rather than alternatives to hydrocarbon use.  I mean here on a time period of a few years to a few decades.  In terms of many decades and centuries its likely to be thorium fission that really delivers.  If we wanted to one day lean most of the burden of energy on heliostats in the deserts, we could probably do that.  But it would likely take centuries.  This is a field of study where time matters.  Try to bias the energy source of your particular choosing, in a great good hurry, you are likely to fail.  The idea ought to be a many-pronged approach in one way, but a two-pronged approach in another.

Lets make it the two-pronged approach.  That is to 1. get energy efficiency WITHOUT energy substitution and 2.  Sponsor many different alternatives with a very thin cash-flow ….. until it becomes obvious that one of your alternatives has hit a sweet spot.  As Diana Ross said “You can’t hurry love, no you’ve just got to wait…”  My favourite energy source for the deserts is heliostats.  My favourite energy source over all right now is thorium energy.  But we must not hurry and use one energy source as an excuse to be exclusionary of another.  You all may have your favourite energy sources but the idea is to set up a series of incentives without picking winners.

We could leave it to the free market of course?  But we don’t have a free market so the phrase “leave it to the free market” is incoherent under modern realities.  We are functioning in a situation of conspirational and evil finance cartel. And we can see that all the way back to the 30’s the oligarchy hated few things more than energy freedom for the masses.

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

“Can it be imagined how many solar panels or even wind turbines that could be made from the metal of just one of these massive modern cruise ships?”

When putting my energy efficiency hat on I take the contrary view that “At least they are not flying in a jet.”

Okay so its in cargo and work-in-progress moving that “anti-gravity transport” (dirigibles, water, perfectly flat rail; (particularly if magnetically floating) gives us the most gains. But I don’t think we ought to be getting in the way of ship-building for luxury cruises.

In the 19th century, you had the phenomenon of the private rail car. Thats the lap of luxury and a beautiful way to travel. So long as the train-lines are close to perfectly flat, its an energy efficient way to travel. Plus today you could take your internet office with you, and catch up on all the library books you’ve been wanting to read.

With their hold on the media, and using a terrorist false flag event, the oligarchy brought the age of the dirigible to an end. Before these murderers committed the Hindenburg terrorist attack we had this fantastically luxurious form of transport that gave you an excellent look at the countryside and was getting to be within the grasp of the middle class. You could take a shower, they had a piano player, you could eat well and there was dancing. Thats a magnificent way to travel.

The luxury “anti-gravity” forms of travel, done right, can amortise the cost of these anti-gravity transport systems for cargo and work-in-progress and thats where the real wealth-creation comes. We ought not begrudge these luxuries. We ought to instead be angry at the fractional reserve usury cartel that puts wealth in fewer and fewer hands.

We ought to get these three other luxury travel systems going at the expense of flying with a jet, and we have to substitute away from all these interstate trucks. Jet flying is a pretty ugly experience by and large. Where substitutes are available, it would be good if we could be taking them up. Particularly overnight rail sleepers. And overnight dirigibles travel.  Both should be a better alternative to interstate jet flights.